What nobody tells you about documentation

Related to this: understanding the various types of documentation, and using them all appropriately. I highly recommend Daniele Procida's talk about this, [0] and the accompanying web page [1]. He gives a useful taxonomy of the 4 kinds of documentation. Through the power of Unicode: ┌──────────────────────────┬─────────────────────────┐ /\ │ Tutorials │ How-to Guide │ || Practical │ (Learning-oriented) │ (Problem-oriented) │ || ├──────────────────────────┼─────────────────────────┤ │ Discussions │ Reference │ || │ (Understanding-oriented) │ (Information-oriented) │ || Theoretical └──────────────────────────┴─────────────────────────┘ \/ <=== Useful for study Useful for coding ===> [0] [VIDEO] (that will take you to the start of the talk proper) [1] [LINK] edit Didn't spot the link to [1] at the bottom of the article :P

It's not a book but a website[1] and a talk[2] that explains a good strategy for writing docs, based on four quadrants. [1] [LINK] [2] [VIDEO]

____Response to Article____ Engineers are rarely good at writing technical documentation, especially compared to technical writers (that is “secretaries” per author’s lingo) which by definition, should be. Engineers generally cost more than technical writers. Good technical writing saves engineering time both during AND after the documentation is produced. Author spends large amount of time, to poorly express that to be a good technical writer, you must understand who needs what and why, then figure out how to solve that the best way based on the context. ____System for to Producing Tech Docs____ Anyone looking for a good system of producing documentation should check out: [LINK] Which has a 30-min presentation: [VIDEO] Prior HN posts on the system are here: [LINK]

To be a good technical writer, you must understand who needs what and why, then figure out how to solve that the best way based on the context. Anyone looking for a good system of producing documentation should check out: [LINK] Which has a 30-min presentation: [VIDEO] Prior HN posts on the system are here: [LINK]

They’re officially related. Personally, prefer the link I used since it provides a table of contents and link to this YouTube presentation on the system: [VIDEO]

I'm a little less than impressed by the presentation here. The idea that Divio is describing here is the Diataxis framework ( [LINK] ), which "is the work of" ( [LINK] ) Daniele Procida ( [LINK] ). Who, incidentally, is also giving the PyCon talk in the video on the page you linked ( [VIDEO] ). But I don't see anything resembling attribution for the ideas. They aren't just common industry knowledge or "received wisdom". (And the "quote" from David Laing at the top isn't really accomplishing anything, either.)